Jolly v. State

1. Ground 1 of the amendment to the motion for a new trial alleges that the court erred in admitting in evidence, over objection, the following: “I put Hubert Bawls on the defendant’s trail, and I had cause to do that.” The only objection then urged to this evidence was that “it is not permissible for a witness to testify something indirectly, by inference, that would not be admissible directly as evidence.” As against this objection the court did not err in admitting this evidence. The ground is incomplete. It is not made to appear to what the witness was testifying “indirectly, by…